IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.35840/2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. M/S.AHL MINING CO. PRIVATE LIMITED, (ERSTWHILE M/S.VSL MINING COMPANY PVT. LTD.) HAVING ITS OFFICE AT ASHOK COLONY, SANDUR, BELLARY DISTRICT, BELLARY – 583 119, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SMT. ARTHI LAD.
2. SMT.ARTHI LAD, W/O.SRI ANIL H LAD, RESIDING AT NO.12, 1ST CROSS ROAD, 1ST MAIN ROAD, NTI LAYOUT, RMV 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 094. .. PETITIONERS (BY SRI V.B.RAVISHANKAR, ADV.) AND:
1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS MANAGEMENT BRANCH, 2ND FLOOR, OFFICE COMPLEX BUILDING, LHO CAMPUS, NO.65, ST. MARK’S ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICE.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, COLLEGE ROAD, HOSAPETE – 583 201. .. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIGNESH SHETTY, ADV. FOR C/R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER’S COMPROMISE ONE TIME SETTLEMENT LETTER DATED 24.01.2018 ISSUED IN RESPONSE TO THE LETTER OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 17.01.2018 (ANNEXURE-J) (VIDE ANNEXURE-K AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri. V.B.Ravishankar, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Sri Vignesh Shetty, learned counsel for caveator/respondent No.1.
2. Petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the parties, same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, petitioners inter alia seek a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioners’ compromise One Time Settlement Letter (OTS) dated 24.01.2018 issued in response to the letter of the respondent dated 17.01.2018.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the representation dated 24.01.2018 for settlement of the loan account under the ‘One Time Settlement’ Scheme may be considered. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents fairly submitted that in case such a representation is not already decided, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the representation under ‘One Time Settlement’ scheme submitted by the petitioners may be decided by the competent authority, if not already decided, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, by a speaking order. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE PKS